answer the question and to reserve his explanations
for later (re-direct). It is utterly impossible to cross-
examine unless the Court controls the witnesses, and
Göring knows he has the Court in his corner.Quite openly sulking, Jackson proposed abandoning the cross-
examination of Göring altogether. Maxwell-Fyfe was aghast. “To
cease now,” he interjected, “would be interpreted as a victory for
Göring’s obstructive tactics.”
“Göring is being permitted to preach,” objected Jackson.
“He is becoming constantly more arrogant, and if this goes on it
will do our countries more harm than good.”
Maxwell-Fyfe agreed. “We must tell the court that we are
dealing with an experienced politician. He will make the pro-
ceedings ridiculous unless the tribunal cooperates. The result
will be that the trial is a disaster.”
He recommended that they unofficially convey this to “our
own judges.” “The Allied Control Council, for instance,” he
continued, “is apprehensive lest Göring’s examination-in-chief
do a great deal of harm in restoring Nazi prestige.”
“This,” agreed Jackson, “is a critical point of the trial as far
as achieving its objective is concerned.” If this remark did not
unmask the true, political face of the trial, Jackson’s subsequent
outburst did. “Göring is permitted to become a hero of the Na-
zis because he dares talk back to the United States. This wins him
admiration from all the Nazis who remain in Germany, and he
will influence the other defendants to do likewise. I almost felt
this afternoon that it would have been wiser to have shot these
men out of hand.”
The British prosecutors were more fortunate than Jackson.
Maxwell-Fyfe, an incisive, bullying barrister who would rise to
the very pinnacles of the British legal establishment, brought